THE vote was eight in favor and six against.
The majority of those who sat en banc decided to remove the Chief Justice through a quo warranto. This is part of their job as members of the Judiciary.
If sitting en banc to decide on this case was not at all constitutional, why did these members ever sit down at all to make a decision? When the decision was done, the Chief Justice was asked by the Judiciary to take a leave of absence, within which the chief Justice visited campuses, met with groups, and campaigned against the decision reached by her fellow Justices.
She continues to proclaim against her fellow Justices who made the decision to let her step down. As is the course of campaigning in anger and proclaiming an injustice, student and non-student protests followed. For a lay person, it’s ridiculous!
All the 14 judges agreed to decide on the situation surrounding The Chief Justice, but when the vote did not sit well with six other judges, the decision is now being labelled as invalid, unconstitutional, illegal, etc.
Where is now the independent quality provided for by the constitution itself, to the Judiciary? Is the constitution joking? Or was it written and created to be interpreted by the general public according to campaign likened to election soirees? The issue has been politicized many say.
No, not only is the issue politicized but it has been plundered and prostituted. Sad to say, the campaigns of the Chief Justice around the country and in the various campuses was allegedly, to awaken anger in her favor and consequently to initiate protests.
She created, from the views of many, a following using the young minds of Filipinos, whose reflections should be molded by listening to many sides of the issue, not only from hers. These young minds are protesting based on an understanding from a Chief Justice’s point, not studying deeply, the other side of this ever annoying issue.
On the other side, the eight Justices who voted in favor of the Chief’s stepping down, remain quiet and do not follow a series of campaign moves around the country and in various campuses to fight for their decision, nor to persuade others to support them.
They have penned their decision, they are strong on this, they are members of the Judiciary, independent as a branch of the Philippine Republic.
They have made a decision, based on their understanding and study of the Law, and their decision came from within the context of their experience and life with, and work with, the former Chief Justice herself.
To this interpretation, only the Justices can have an access and the wisdom to judge, because only they have lived and worked within the institution and with the chief Justice herself.
It was Carl Jung who said that protests are a form of oppression too. It harasses, belittles and twists the arm of the public to believe, to dissent and to destroy what has been put in place. But to the Justices who made their decision, I salute you for your silence, for the quietude of your temperament, for your humility to stand amidst the brunt of jeering complaints, protests, anger and invectives. Your quietude, your silence, is the major feature of what sages of old call wisdom.
Thank you. Truly, Wisdom rests on the aged.
Baguio, I love you!